but that the Bishop of Meaux stops us to reflect upon the History and Doctrine of Vigilantius whose Name is too famous and his Memory too unworthily torn by that Bishop not to afford him that Defence which his Zeal against Superstition doth justly deserve CHAP. IV. An Examination of the Opinions of Vigilantius VIgilantius was born in Aquitain as is proved by de Marca in a Dissertation of his which is not yet published and Priest in the Diocess of Barcelona he had contracted a particular Friendship with St. Paulinus who was ordained Priest at Barcelona St. Paulinus recommended him in particular to St. Jerome as he passed through Campania where St. Paulinus was Bishop in his way to Jerusalem St. Jerome received him with all the Affection possible in the Year 394. and calls him the Holy Priest Vigilantius in his 13 th Epistle to St. Paulinus He made no long stay in the Holy Land it is probable that the Disputes about Origenism which troubled that Province obliged him to return the sooner St. Jerom seems to insinuate that Vigilantius had been gained by Rufinus Enemy to St. Jerom and that after Vigilantius was come into Egypt and in some other Provinces he accused St. Jerom for having too great a Liking for the Writings of Origen c. decrying him every-where as an Origenist This was the true Cause of the Hate and Rage of St. Jerom against Vigilantius whereof we have a very sensible Instance in his 75 th Epistle which he wrote against Vigilantius about the Year 397. where he treats him with the greatest Indignity Vigilantius being returned into Gaul seems to have made his abode there and to have published a certain Treatise about the Year 406. against the worshipping of Relicks which about 60 Years before was introduced into the Church St. Jerom being informed hereof had an Occasion offered him of defending the Superstition of the common People against the Censures of Vigilantius and of unloading against him the most injurious Language that Hatred could inspire The Writers of the Church of Rome have not been wanting long since to draw their Advantage from these Invectives of St. Jerom against the Protestants and never speak of Vigilantius but as a Heretick The Bishop of Meaux hath carefully traced their Steps he tells us therefore after his manner very confidently that even in the fourth Century the most clear-sighted of all the rest there was found but one only Vigilantius who opposed himself against the Honours given to the Saints and the worshipping of their Relicks yet he is look'd upon by the Protestants as the Person who has preserved the Depositum that is to say the Succession of the Apostolical Doctrine and is preferred by them to St. Jerom who hath the whole Church for him This of Necessity obligeth us to take a particular view of the Opinions of Vigilantius I shall not make a stop to invalidate what the Bishop saith that Vigilantius wrote in the fourth Century nor at his endeavouring to cloak the Notion of his Church concerning the religious Worship they give to Saints and to Relicks under the indeterminate Expression of the Honours of Saints and the Worship of Relicks But to come to the thing it self I maintain that if Vigilantius had the Misfortune of falling under the Displeasure of St. Jerom by the Censure he pronounced against the popular Superstition of rendring various Honours to the Relicks of Saints yet was he never condemned by the Church that then was nor treated as an Heretick Gennadius owns that Vigilantius had an elegant Stile and that his Zeal for Religion had engaged him to write I own that he charges him with a Mistake in his Explication of the second Vision of Daniel and in some other Articles for which he reckoneth him amongst Hereticks But we are to take notice 1 st that Gennadius wrote an hundred Years after Vigilantius and so follows the Judgment St. Jerom had given before of him 2 dly That he calls these Articles Heretical after the manner of ancient Authors who very frankly bestowed the Name of Heresy on every thing that displeased them though it had never been condemned by the Scripture nor rejected by the Body of the Church 3 dly That he look'd upon these pretended Heresies as of very small Importance because he speaks of an absurd Explication of the second Vision of Daniel which St. Jerom had revived as of an Error more considerable than those of Vigilantius which he does not express and mentions them as Trifles However be it as it will if the Bishop of Meaux maintains these two things 1 st That Vigilantius was the only Man that opposed the Honours of the Saints and the Worship of Relicks and 2 dly That St. Jerom had the whole Church on his side in his Answer I maintain against the Bishop that either he is deceived himself or was willing to deceive his Reader in both these things The Falsity of the first will appear to every one that can read St. Jerom's Book against Vigilantius St. Jerom himself witnesseth that the holy Bishop in whose Diocess Vigilantius was a Priest that is to say the Bishop of Barcelona was of Vigilantius's Opinion so that we have already discovered one Bishop whom St. Jerom endeavoured to conceal from us but we shall find a greater number whom St. Jerom himself owns to have approved Vigilantius's Opinion lest we should imagine that Vigilantius and his Bishop were Schismaticks O horrible saith St. Jerom some Bishops also are said to be Partakers of his Crimes And we may judg of St. Jerom's Moderation by that which follows Si tamen Episcopi nominandi sunt qui non ordinant Diaconos nisi primo uxores duxerint nulli caelibi credentes pudicitiam If we may call them Bishops who ordain none to be Deacons except they be married not trusting the Chastity of any unmarried Person What then shall we conclude that so many Churches whose Bishops and Priests were all married had no lawful Bishops or Priests Can any thing be conceived more extravagant than this To this Acknowledgment of St. Jerom we may add what he saith himself on the 65 th Chapter of Isaiah for he owns that Vigilantius's blaming of that popular Superstition had induced divers Persons in Gaul to abstain from frequenting the Churches of the Martyrs and to withdraw themselves from the Prayers that were made there The Falsity of the second Article will be no less evident if we examine the manner of St. Jerom's defending himself against Vigilantius for though he had undertaken to run down Vigilantius yet after all he agrees with him in the main St. Jerom owns in his 53 d Epistle which he writes to Riparius that Vigilantius had writ twice against the Worship of Relicks and that he called those that adored them Cinerarii and Idolaters qui mortuorum hominum ossa venerarentur who did honour the Bones of dead Men for which St. Jerom calls him a Samaritan and a Jew because he counted
Power into Spain to examine those that were Hereticks and being found such to take away their Lives and Estates Neither was it to be doubted but that this Storm would have reach'd the greatest part of Believers because of the small Distinction made between them and the other for then they judged Persons only by the Eye esteeming them Hereticks from their pale Looks or Habit rather than by their Faith He afterwards shews the Horror that St. Martin had conceived against these kind of Proceedings There was nothing he was more concerned about Illa praecipua cura ne Tribuni cum jure gladiorum ad Hispanias mitterentur Than to prevent the Tribunes being sent into Spain with the Power of the Sword He renounced Communion with these sanguinary Bishops but not long after to avoid a greater Mischief he was obliged to give up that Point though he still refused to subscribe to the Condemnation of the Priscillianists Hujus diei communionem Martinus iniit satius aestimans ad horam cedere quam his non consulere quorum cervicibus gladius imminebat veruntamen summâ vi Episcopis nitentibus ut communionem illam subscriptione firmaret extorqueri non potuit Martin communicated with them at that time thinking it better for a while to give way to them than not to provide for their Safety who had the Sword hanging over them But yet though the Bishops used their utmost Endeavours to make him ratify his communicating with them by his Subscription they could never bring him to it If we consult Vincentius Lirinensis and Cassian they will afford us much Light as to the State of these Diocesses Vincentius a Priest of the Monastery of Lerins is one of those who can best inform us what was esteemed Orthodox in these Churches Indeed we find all the peculiar Doctrines of the Church of Rome are condemned in the Maxims that he solidly asserts in the 28 th Chapter of his Commonitorium where he maintains that the Church may every day make a further Progress in the Knowledg of Truth and all this without making any Innovation Crescat igitur oportet multum vehementerque proficiat tam singulorum quam omnium tam unius hominis quam totius Ecclesiae aetatum ac saeculorum gradibus intelligentia scientia sapientia sed in suo duntaxat genere in eodem se dogmate eodem sensu eademque sententia The Understanding Knowledg and Wisdom as well of every singular Person as of the whole Church ought to grow and greatly increase according to the several Degrees of Times and Ages but every one in his own way that is to say in the same Doctrine in the same Sense and the same Judgment 2. He in the same place exclaims against all new Doctrines and new Names and yet owns that the Church acquires daily more Light in matters of Religion Sed ita tamen ut vere profectus sit ille fidei non permutatio But yet so that this is really an Advancement not a Change of Faith 3. He reduces all that we ought to believe to the Rule of Faith and declares what is the true use and the true Authority of the Doctors of the Church Quae tamen antiqua sanctorum Patrum consensio non in omnibus divinae legis quaestiunculis sed solum certè praecipuè in fidei regula magno nobis studio investiganda est sequenda Quibus tamen Patribus hâc lege credendum est ut quicquid vel omnes vel plures uno eodemque sensu manifestè frequenter perseveranter velut quodam consentiente sibi magistrorum consilio accipiendo tenendo tradendo firmaverint id pro indubitato certo ratoque habeatur But yet this primitive Consent of the Holy Fathers is not to be inquired after and followed as to the lesser Questions of Divine Law alike but especially if not only in the Rule of Faith Which Fathers we may give full Credit to on this Condition that whatsoever all or the most of them do in the same sense manifestly frequently and constantly maintain as in a Council of Masters agreeing together by their receiving holding and delivering the same that ought to be esteemed unquestionable certain and firm 4. He lays down a Method how we may dispute with the Church of Rome about the Errors she has drawn from Antiquity by reducing the whole Dispute to the Scripture Atque ideo quascunque illas antiquiores vel Schismatum vel Haereseωn profanitates nullo modo nos oportet nisi aut sola si opus est Scripturarum authoritate convincere aut certe jam antiquitus universalibus Sacerdotum Catholicorum Conciliis convictas damnatasque vitare Wherefore we are no other way to convict all ancient Errors of Schism or Heresy but either if need be by the sole Authority of Scripture or else to avoid them as already condemned by the universal Councils of Catholick Priests 5. He excellently explains the Use of Tradition without derogating any thing from the Sufficiency of Scripture Diximus in superioribus hanc fuisse semper esse hodieque Catholicorum consuetudinem ut fidem veram duobus istis mediis adprobent primum Divini Canonis authoritate deinde Ecclesiae traditione non quia Canon solus non sibi ad universa sufficiat sed quia verba Divina pro suo plerique arbitratis interpretantes varias opiniones erroresque concipiant atque ideo necesse sit ut ad unam Ecclesiastici sensus regulam scripturae coelestis intelligentia dirigatur in iis duntaxat praecipuè quaestionibus quibus totius Catholici dogmatis fundamenta nituntur We have said before that this hath been and still is the Custom of Catholicks to prove the true Faith two ways 1 st by the Authority of the Divine Canon And 2 dly by the Churches Tradition not as if the Canon were not of it self sufficient but because most Men interpret Scripture according to their own private Fancy which has given occasion to various Opinions and Errors Wherefore it is needful that the Understanding of Holy Scripture be regulated by one single Determination of the Church and particularly in those Questions on which the Foundations of all Catholick Doctrine rest Lastly He desires that universal Consent may be taken only from such a Tradition as he authorizeth Item diximus in ipsa rursus Ecclesia universitatis pariter ac antiquitatis consensionem spectari oportere ne aut ab unitatis integritate in partem schismatis abrumpamur aut à vetustatis religione in Haereseωn novitates praecipitemur We have said also that in the Church we are to have an Eye to the Consent of Universality and Antiquity that wee be not rent from the entire Union into a Schism or be cast headlong from the Religion of the Ancients into the Novelties of Heresy There needs little more than these Maxims to secure a Church where they are taught from those Corruptions into which the Church of
be given for you and this is my Blood which shall be shed for many for the Remission of Sins But it is plain that Charlemain understands by the Word Image a Prototype like the Shadows of the Law with respect to which it is true what many of the Fathers have said that the Sacraments of the New Testament are the Body and the Truth though otherwise considered as Sacraments they are sacred Signs which cannot be confounded with the things signified by them without renouncing the Light of common sense Moreover we are to observe that Charlemain never said that the Eucharist is properly the Body of Jesus Christ If he denies Jesus Christ to have said concerning the Eucharist this is the Image of my Body taking the Word as a Prototype and a Shadow of things to come yet he always holds that it is his Body in a Sacramental Sense for he never speaks of the Eucharist as the Body of our Lord without adding the Restriction of Sacrament or of Mystery If saith he he hears the Mystery of the Body and of the Blood once mentioned and twice together he hath bestowed upon us the Sacrament of his Body and of his Blood And lastly the Mystery of the Body and of the Blood cannot be called an Image Now the Word Mystery according to the constant Use of the Church properly signifies the Symbol the Figure the sacred Sign of the Body and Blood of our Saviour Lastly We ought to observe that though he says that the Sacrament is the Body of Jesus Christ yet he never saith that it ought to be adored Indeed he ought to have drawn up an Impeachment against these Worshippers of Images upon this Article and a very important one too because it is very evident that the Greek Worshippers of Images did not adore the Eucharist but gave only a simple Veneration to it like to that which they bestowed upon the Cross the Altar and the Gospel as one of their Authors tells us in a Book which they call An Invective of the Orthodox against the Opposers of Images printed at the Louvre in 1685. in the Collection of Authors who have writ since Theophanes CHAP. IX The Faith of the Churches of Aquitain and Narbon in the Ninth Century CHarlemain that great Man who lived till the Year 814. maintained the Spirit of Opposition against the Errors and Superstitions of the Church of Rome that espoused the Interest of the Image-Worshippers by approving the second Council of Nice This Council having established the Authority of Tradition as being a necessary Principle to support the Worship of Images we find that the Churches of Aquitain and Narbon kept themselves firmly to the Authority of the Scriptures grounding their Faith thereon and regulating their Worship according to the same Of this we have an illustrious Example in the Council of Arles assembled in the Year 813 by the Order of Charlemain whereat the Arch-bishop of Narbon assisted with his Suffragans For the Fathers of this Council thought fit to begin it with a Profession of their Faith which is nothing but an Extract of that Creed which bears the Name of Athanasius and this is that which they ordain should be preached to the People for the Catholick Faith without so much as mentioning one Word of those Articles of Faith that the Church of Rome now imposeth Charlemain had ordered a Collection of Homilies to be made out of the Works of Origen St. Ambrose St. Chrysostom St. Jerom St. Augustin St. Leo St. Maximus St. Gregory and Bede which he caused to be published in these Diocesses as well as the rest of his Empire now these Homilies do so strongly oppose the most part of those Novelties which were then endeavoured to be introduced that this Book for a long time served as a Bar to hinder People from leaning too much towards those things that incline Men to Superstition There is no Protestant in the least versed in the Matters of Controversy who seeing the Names of those ancient Doctors comprized in this Collection will not remember how much these Fathers have opposed themselves to a Multitude of Corruptions which prevailed at last by the factious Endeavours of some of the latter Popes wherefore I may excuse my self from making an Extract of this Collection choosing rather to produce other Witnesses which the same Diocess affords us concerning the Faith of these Diocesses in the ninth Century I can only produce three or four but to recompense the smallness of their Number they are Men against whose Authority the most contentious Adversaries will have nothing to oppose In the first place it is certain that as the Bishops of Aquitain and Narbon had set themselves against the Superstition and Idolatry of the Greeks and the Pope in the matter of Images at the Council of Francfort so their Successors imitated their Zeal and Vigor in the Synod at Paris in 824 upon the same Question where they determin'd that Pope Adrian who had writ an Answer to the Book of Charlemain and therein undertaken the Defence of the second Council of Nice had made use of in the said Reply superstitious Testimonies and not at all to the purpose answering what he thought fit and not what was agreeable And besides they drew up a new Collection of great Numbers of Arguments against this superstitious Worship to recal Pope Paschal and those of his Party from their doating on Images We can shew further that the same Zeal was continued in this Diocess Baluzius hath acknowledged and so has Massonus before him that the Book of Agobardus Arch-bishop of Lions concerning Pictures expresseth no more than the general Opinions of the Bishops of France and Germany concerning this Point But it may not be amiss to quote it in particular not only to shew what were the Opinions of the Churches of Aquitain and Narbon because though he was born in Spain yet he had continued for a long time in Aquitain whither he was invited because of the general Esteem he had gained to be the Coadjutor to Leidradus Arch-bishop of Lions to whom he succeeded but also because it appears by his Works that the most illustrious Bishops of Gallia Narbonensis carefully consulted him in Matters of Difficulty as their Master being indeed a most famous Doctor able to instruct and inform them 1. He declares as St. Augustin did before him that we can never equalize the Authority of any Interpreter whatsoever to that of the Apostles Concerning Expositors also St. Austin hath delivered That we are to hold far otherwise than you do whom not only in his Book which he hath writ against Faustus the Manichee concerning those who have been blamed by the Doctors yea the best of them speaks thus which sort of Writings that is to say Expositions are not to be read with a Necessity of believing but with a Liberty of judging for those Books only that are of Divine Authority are to be read not with a Liberty of
the one ignorant and loose who were a sort of Manichees the other more learned and remote from such Filthiness who held much the same Opinions as the Calvinists and were called Henricians or Waldenses though the People ignorantly confounded them with the Cathari Bulgarians c. Mezeray had spoken more exactly had he said That the People were abused by the Bishops and Clergy who purposely confounded the ancient Followers of Peter de Bruys and Henry with the Manichees and Cathari to make them odious CHAP. XV. That it doth not appear from the Conference of Alby that the Albigenses were Manichees HAving thus justified Peter de Bruys Henry and his Disciples from the Imputation of Manicheism which the Bishop of Meaux has endeavoured to fasten upon them We will yet further endeavour to clear this Point by examining the Conference of Alby from whence the Bishop thinks that he has drawn a solid Argument to confirm his Imputation Let us see how this Conference is related by Roger Hoveden in his Annals upon the Year 1176. It was in this Year that the Arian Heresy was condemned which had well nigh infected all the Province of Tholouse There were saith he certain Hereticks in the Province of Tholouse who called themselves the Good Men they were supported by the Militia of Lombez and preached and taught the People contrary to the Christian Faith professing themselves not to own the Law of Moses nor the Prophets nor the Psalms nor any part of the Old Testament nor the Doctors of the New Testament save only the Gospels and the Epistles of St. Paul with the seven Canonical Epistles the Acts of the Apostles and the Revelation Being question'd concerning their Faith proceeds he and concerning the Baptism of Infants and whether they were saved by Baptism and concerning the Body and Blood of our Lord where it was consecrated or by whom and who were those that received it and whether it were more or better consecrated by a good Man than by a wicked Man and concerning Marriage if a Man and Woman could be saved that knew one another carnally They answered That they would say nothing of their Faith nor of the Baptism of Infants neither were they obliged to say any thing of those Matters Concerning the Body and Blood of our Saviour they said That he who received it worthily was saved and that he who received it unworthily procured his own Condemnation Concerning Marriage they said that a Man and Woman join themselves together to avoid Fornication as St. Paul saith They also declared many things without being questioned as that they ought not to use any Oaths whatsoever as St. John said in his Gospel and St. James in his Epistle They said also that St. Paul had foretold that they ought to ordain Bishops and Priests in the Church and that if these Orders were not conferred upon such as he there commands that then they were neither Bishops nor Priests but ravening Wolves Hypocrites and Deceivers who loved the Salutations in the Market-places the first Places and the first Seats at Feasts who love to be called Masters against the the Commandment of Jesus Christ who wear white and shining Garments who wear Rings of Gold and precious Stones on their Fingers which their Master never commanded them Accordingly they maintained that since the Bishops and Priests were like to those Priests who betrayed our Saviour Jesus Christ they ought not to obey them because they were wicked After divers Reasons alledged on both sides in Presence of the Bishop of Alby they chose and setled Judges on both sides with Consent of the Bishop of Alby After this Roger Hoveden observes that the Prelates cited divers Authorities out of the New Testament for these Hereticks saith he would not be determined but by the New Testament and that afterwards the Bishop of Lions pronounced the definitive Sentence drawn from the New Testament in these terms I Gislebert Bishop of Lions at the Command of the Bishop of Alby and his Assessors do judg that they are Hereticks and I condemn the Opinions of Oliver and his Companions where-ever they are And we judg this from the New Testament I bring therefore for this Reason Proofs to confirm the Divinity of the Old Testament drawn from the New and thereby oppose these Hereticks because they owned that they received Moses the Prophets and the Psalms only in those Particulars which Jesus and his Apostles had by their Testimony approved and not in others whereupon he maintains with reason that if an Instrument or Testimony in Writing is allowed of in one part the whole must needs be owned or else wholly cast aside In the second place saith he We convict them and judg them to be Hereticks by the Authorities of the New Testament for we say that he has not the Catholick Faith who doth not confess it when he is required and when it is exposed to any Danger whence it is that our Lord in the Acts of the Apostles saith to Ananias speaking of Paul For he is to me a chosen Vessel to carry my Name c. These Hereticks also boast themselves that they do not lie whereas we maintain that they lie manifestly for there is Deceit in holding ones Peace as well as speaking wherefore also Paul boldly resisted Peter to his Face because he gave way to the Circumcised In the third place saith he We convict and judg them to be Hereticks by the Authorities of the New Testament for we say that God will have all Men to be saved c. After which he produces the Proofs for Infant-Baptism and solves the Objection taken from Infants wanting Faith without which it is impossible to please God We say that it is by the Faith of the Church or of their God-fathers as the Man sick of the Palsy was healed by the Faith of those who presented him and let him down thorow the Tiling of the House In the fourth place saith he We do convict and judg them as Hereticks by the Authorities of the New Testament because the Body of our Lord cannot be consecrated but by a Priest be he good or bad which he proves because Consecration is made by the Words of Jesus Christ Moreover he proves that the Consecration of the Body of our Lord must be celebrated in the Church and by the Ministers of the Church only whose Authority he asserts from Passages of Scripture Clerks therefore and Lay-men pursues he must be obedient for God's Sake to these Priests Bishops and Deacons be they good or bad according to what our Lord saith The Scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses's Chair whatsoever therefore they say do ye but do not according to their Works for they say and do not In the fifth place We convict and judg them to be Hereticks by the Authority of the New Testament because they will not own that Man and Wife if carnally joined can be saved and yet they are wont to preach in publick that
Preaching tends to the Subversion of the Weak and Ignorant Above all they prove from Scripture that Women to whom Silence only is recommended must not undertake to teach Lastly They represent to the Waldenses that they do ill in rejecting Prayer for the Dead which hath so much Foundation in Scripture and so clear a Succession in Tradition And as these Hereticks absented themselves from the Churches to pray amongst themselves in private in their Houses they tell them that they ought not to leave the House of Prayer the Holiness whereof was so much recommended in Scripture and even by the Son of God himself Here we may see the Albigenses in case they be the Persons concern'd though the Bishop pretends they are the Waldenses sufficiently cleared from all the Accusations of Manicheism that can be formed against their Faith For according to these Articles if we believe the Bishop of Meaux they cannot be charged with any thing of Arianism much less of Manicheism I cannot perfectly agree to what the Bishop of Meaux concludes from their examining only these pretended Differences in the Conference held before the Archbishop of Narbon that there was no other Difference betwixt the Church of Rome and those against whom the Papists disputed at this Conference There are solid Reasons that hinder me from being of the Bishop's Opinion but however it be he cannot defend himself from having furnished his Adversaries with the most compendious way in the World to overthrow without much enquiry all that he had done to prove that the Albigenses were guilty of Manicheism For in truth this Dispute whereof the Abbot of Foncaud gives us an account was not maintain'd against the Vaudois but against the Albigenses For 1. the Bishop might easily have discover'd as much from the Presence of the Archbishop of Narbon the Matter in question relating to the Interest of his Diocess 2. Because the Abbot of Foncaud who is the Relator was one of the principal Actors his Abby being in the Diocess of Narbon 3. Because this Conference with some others served as a Prologue to the Cruelties exercised against the Albigenses the Church of Rome and her Ministers having already made use of these Ways of Sweetness before they came to the Extremities of a Croisade which interrupted their other Projects towards Greece and the Holy-Land It follows clearly from hence that according to the Acknowledgment of the Bishop the Albigenses cannot be more justly accused of Manicheism than the Vaudois concerning whom he pretends that the Abbot of Foncaud speaks I cannot imagine how the Bishop can answer the Force of this Argument except only by denying that he is mistaken and pretending that this Conference was held with some of the Vaudois who had fled into the Diocess of Narbon and had so considerably propagated their Doctrine there that a publick Dispute was judg'd necessary to stop the progress of it But 1 st it would be very strange that they should be able in so short a time to make themselves more considerable than the Petrobusians and the Henricians with whom we know that the Diocesses of Aquitain and Narbon were already fill'd according to the Testimony of their Enemies 2 dly Were it so it would be necessary to suppose that Bernard Archbishop of Narbon who died the second of October 1191 made it his Business to stop the Progress of some of Waldo's Disciples who at that time could scarcely be known John de Beauxmains Archbishop of Lions who condemned Peter Waldo not having possessed his See above 10 Years as far as we can judg which he then quitted to retire to Clairvaux whilst in the mean time he took no notice of the Petrobusians and Henricians 3 dly It is ridiculous to suppose against the Credit of all Historians that the Vaudois compos'd a distinct Body from the Albigenses who as we shall shew hereafter clearly suppose that there were no Vaudois that had Churches and that made a distinct Body 4 thly Neither do we find that the cruel Inquisition made any such like distinction about this Matter in using more or less Cruelty according to the Degrees of Schism and Heresy as 't is pretended they ought to do in case they would act justly But whatever Answer the Bishop may invent to defend his Opinion we have a sure Way to overthrow it without remedy and 't is the same which he himself hath furnish'd us with for he owns that the Conference of 1206 mentioned by the Monk of Vaux Cernay was a Conference with the Vaudois Besides that which Bernard Abbot of Foncaud hath set down we have another saith he in Peter of Vaux Cernay about the year 1206 where the Vaudois were confounded now all Men know that the Conference of 1206 was held with the Albigenses as Peter of Vaux Cernay who lived at that time assures us in his History of the Albigenses But why then will the Bishop say Did not they dispute before the Bishop of Nismes and the Archbishop of Narbon but only upon these four Points The Question is easily answered They disputed about many other Articles but either he who wrote the Conference did not give us a Relation of the whole as not supposing it convenient to publish their Objections against those other Opinions and Superstitions which the Albigenses oppos'd or else they wanted time to examine the other Articles of the Roman Faith which they rejected What I say now is not a Conjecture at random produced only to stop the Bishop's Answer but is Matter of Fact grounded upon the Relation which we have of the Conference of Montreal as I shall shew hereafter All this will lead us to pass a true Judgment on the Condemnations which the Popes King Alphonsus and the Emperor Frederick II issued out against the Albigenses in their Bulls and Edicts They endeavour'd in short to make them be look'd upon as infamous Manichees as a Company of Arians and as the most execrable Hereticks The Popes prepossessed the Kings and Emperors with these Notions by the reproachful Names which they fastned upon them after they had gotten the power to lead them by the Nose as so many wild Beasts hence proceeds that heap of Names which we find in the Bulls and Edicts of that time The Reflection we ought to make on all these Terms of Obloquy is this that excepting only the Names of Publicans and Cathari particularly given to the Manichees it appears from these Edicts that the Albigenses and the Waldenses did both believe the same thing But if what I have said is sufficient to shew the Injustice of the Bishop of Meaux in making the Albigenses pass for Manichees the matter may be still further cleared if we turn over the Books of Alanus Magnus surnamed the Vniversal Doctor for it appears clearly from his Treatise against the Hereticks of his time and above all against the Albigenses which he dedicated to William Prince of Montpellier that it was the Fashion at
pretended to confirm them by Confessions which the Cruelty of their Tortures have forced from them Neither is it only in this Work of his that St. Irenaeus informs us what in his time was the Faith of these Churches planted in Gaul for he hath left us five Books and Eusebius has preserved for us some Epistles of that ancient Bishop altogether refulgent with the Purity of the Faith delivered by the Apostles 1. St. Irenaeus gives us this for one Character of the Gnosticks that they embraced Doctrines which were not to be found in the Writings of the Prophets or the Apostles Lib. 1. cap. 1. p. 33. And 't is with the same Spirit that he attributes to Hereticks the accusing of the Scripture for being unintelligible without the Help of Tradition whereas he maintains that that which had been preached was committed to Writing by the special Will of God to the end it might be the Ground and Pillar of our Faith Lib. 3. c. 1 2. And that it is to make the Apostles Hypocrites to suppose that they taught some things in publick and others in private whence it appears clearly that when he makes use of Tradition he only does it with respect to those scriptural Doctrines which the Hereticks opposed and whereof they pretended that the Apostles had left the contrary to those that succeeded them Lib. 3. c. 2. 'T is upon this occasion that he alledgeth the Testimony of the Church of Rome founded by the Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul as of one that was most known Ad hanc enim Ecclesiam saith he propter potentiorem Principalitatem necesse est omnem convenire Ecclesiam hoc est eos qui sunt undique fideles in quo semper ab his qui sunt undique conservata est ea quae est ab Apostolis Traditio For to this Church because of its more powerful Superiority it behoves the whole Church to come that is the Believers of all Parts for as much as therein the Tradition from the Apostles has always peen preserved by the Believers of all parts It is apparent that whatsoever Design he may have had to raise the Authority of the Church of Rome he makes no other use of it than to make out that it was impossible those Doctrines which the Hereticks gave out for Apostolical should be really so seeing they were unknown to a Church which had had the Apostles and their Successors for her Guides more especially seeing that Church was placed in the very Seat of the Empire which continually drew to Rome a vast number of Believers from all the different places of the Empire from whence they brought not along with them a different Tradition from that which they found in the Bosom of the Church of Rome That St. Irenaeus had no other aim but this is owned by F. Quesnel in his Notes upon the tenth Epistle of St. Leo pag. 809. And this appears evidently because after all that Esteem which he had for the Church of Rome he was not afraid to write to her Bishop very censuring Letters upon the account of his having excommunicated the Churches of Asia that celebrated Easter the fourteenth of the Moon of March as also because he continued in the Communion of those Churches of Asia without being concerned at the Excommunication of the Pope of Rome 2. He reduces the whole Faith of Christians throughout the World to that which we call the Apostles Creed without mentioning so much as a Word of those Doctrines which the Church of Rome has superadded to it pretending to confirm them by Tradition Lib. 1. c. 2. 3. He maintains the Scriptures to be both clear and perfect Lib. 2. c. 47. 4. He rejects the Doctrines which the Hereticks grounded upon the Explication of some Parables maintaining that nothing ought to be established but upon clear and evident places of Scripture Lib. 2. c. 46. 5. It appears by his Writings that Penance at that time was publick without dispensing with Women that were overtaken with the Sins of Uncleanness by which means being exposed to extream Confusion it made some of them abjure Christianity Lib. 1. c. 9. 6. He makes it appear that Caelibat was not yet known in Asia whence these first Christians of the Gauls derived their Original which is acknowledged by the Fevardentius Lib. 1. c. 9. 7. He assigns to the Marcosians the custom of anointing those they received into their Communion with Balm Opobalsamo which shews that at that time extream Unction was not known And we may make the same Observation from his imputing to other Hereticks the anointing of Persons at the Point of Death with Oil and Water Lib. 1. c. 18. 8. He attributes to the Gnosticks the Imitation of the Heathens because they had the Images of Jesus Christ Lib. 1. c. 24. which makes it evident that the Christians had no Images much less that they gave to them any religious Worship And indeed we find him reasoning lib. 2. c. 6. after such a manner as shews that the Christians were yet in full Possession of a Right to reproach the Heathens with all those Absurdities that arise from the Use of Images The same may also be gathered from lib. 2. c. 42. where he divides the Law into two Tables in a manner very different from that of the Doctors of the Roman Church and altogether conformable to the Judgment of Josephus and other Jewish Doctors 9. He makes it appear that he knew nothing of the Separability of Accidents from their Subjects which is the sole Support of Transubstantiation lib. 2. c. 14. 10. He in plain terms â—ejects the Invocation of Angels instead thereof recommending that of our Saviour Jesus Christ lib. 2. c. 57. 11. He asserts that the Blessed Virgin had unseasonable Motions intempestivam festinationem John 2.3 so far was he from believing her wholly free from Sin lib. 2. c. 18. This shews that when he saith cap. 33. Quod alligavit Virgo Eva per incredulitatem hoc Virgo Maria solvit per fidem What the Virgin Eve bound up by her Unbelief that the Virgin Mary set free by her Faith he doth not own the Virgin for the Person that saved Men but his meaning is like that of Hesychius who said speaking of the Women to whom Jesus Christ appeared after his Resurrection Invenêre enim saith he mulieres quod olim amisere per Evam lucrum invenit ea quae damni occasionem praebuerat For the Women found what formerly they lost by Eve she found the Gain who had been an occasion of the Loss T. 15. B. P. p. 823. col 1. And this is the sense likewise of that other Passage of St. Irenaeus which we find lib. 5. c. 19. for though he calls the Virgin Eve's Advocate it plainly appears that he meant nothing else but what is express'd by St. Chrysostom in Ps 44. T. 3. p. 221. Virgo nos Paradiso expulit per Virginem vitam aternam invenimus A Virgin drove us
judging but with a necessity of believing which form the Apostle himself delivered saying Quench not the Spirit despise not Prophecies try all things hold fast what is good abstain from every Appearance of Evil. Which is absolutely false if an infallible Principle has continued in the Church whether in the Person of the Pope or in Councils or that we must of Necessity explain Scripture according to the Sense of the Fathers as the Church of Rome has defined 2. We see with what force he maintains the Canons of the Gallican Church against the Contempt which some cast upon them because they had been made without the Pope's Concurrence 3. We do not find that in his time they applied to the Blessed Virgin the Words of the first Promise by reading Ipsa tuum conteret caput She shall bruise thy Head for he reads Ipse tuum He shall bruise c. when he disputes against Felix Bishop of Vrgel 4. He maintains in the same place that the Notion of a Peoples being without Sin who yet confess themselves to be Sinners out of Humility is pure Pelagianism That if this is the Property of humble Saints why then doth John the Apostle say If we say that we have no Sin we deceive our selves and the Truth is not in us but if we confess our Sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our Sins Who if like you he had been inclined to have not mean but great Thoughts of himself he had whereof he might glory because he lay in the Bosom of his Lord and was beloved of him above the rest of his Disciples James the Apostle also saith In many things we offend all which if any shall imagine not to be spoke in Truth but by way of Humility let him know that therein he follows Pelagius 5. He plainly declares that our Communion in the Sacrament is the same with that of the Believers of old when he applies that Passage of the 1 st to the Corinthians chap. 10. ver 1 and 2. of the drinking of the Holy Ghost and maintains in these terms that there is no other Difference between the Believers of the Old and New Testament but this That the great Sacraments of Salvation which are wrought by the Mediator for us and for them save us as being already past but them as yet to come because we believe and hold what is past they believed and held what was to come they held them only in their Minds as Figures of future things but we in an open Profession Vows and Declaration of things past under the Signification of sensible Sacraments as those two who carried one Cluster of Grapes upon a Staff did indifferently do the same Work only that the one of them had it behind his Back and the other before his Face I should be obliged to transcribe his whole Book against Pictures and Images if I should go about to extract all that it contains in Opposition to the Opinions of the Church of Rome It will be sufficient for us to observe that the Romish Index Expurgatorius hath forbid this Book as well as the rest till its Errors be expunged and indeed it did deserve no less for it maintains according to the Doctrine of St. Augustin that we ought not to adore any Image of God but only that which is God himself even his eternal Son and that it is a piece of Folly and Sacriledg to vouchsafe any Worship to Images and to call them Holy as the second Council of Nice had done He refutes the Excuse of the Council of Trent which only considers those as Idolaters that attribute something of Divinity to the Image He maintains it to be mere Paganism to have Images for any other use than that of a Memorial and at the same time asserts that Images are of as little Use and Advantage as the Picture of a Mower or of some Hero in Armour can advantage a Mower or Souldier who looks upon those Pictures In a Word he speaks exactly like a true Iconoclast for after he had said that it was impossible any longer to bear with the Abuses against which he had taken Pen in hand he adds From whence we may plainly infer that if Hezekiah a Godly and Religious King brake the brazen Serpent made by God's express Command because the mistaken Multitude began to worship it as an Idol for which his Piety was very much commended much more religiously may and ought the Images of the Saints they themselves approving it be broken and ground to Pouder which were never set up by God's Command but are absolutely human Inventions But besides this there are four other Articles which are as disrelishing to the Church of Rome as these 1. He maintains that there is no other Mediator between God and Men save Jesus Christ God and Man which he proves by the Authority of St. Augustin de Civ Dei l. 9. c. 15. 2. He looks upon those as worthy to be anathematized and excommunicated from the Church of God who should undertake to dedicate a Church to the most excellent of Saints or Angels If any of us saith he should make a Temple of Wood or Stone to any though the most excellent of Saints we ought for doing that to be anathematized from the Truth of Christ and from the Church of God because by so doing we should give that Worship to the Creature which is only due to the Creator 3. Having given a Relation of the manner how the Faithful gathered up the Bones of St. Polycarp and interr'd them in a place where they intended to meet and celebrate his Memory to encourage Believers to imitate the constancy of that Martyr he declares that all manner of Worship or Honour done to them over and above this is unlawful religious Worship being due to God alone 4. He proves that his Judgment concerning these Points is founded upon the Example of the antient Doctors up-their Opinions and upon the Book of the Sacraments of the Church of Rome that it was the ground of the antient Doctors of the Church who rejected the Worship which the Arians gave to Jesus Christ as idolatrous tho they owned him to be no more than a Man The Reader needs not take much pains to apprehend why Rome thought fit to condemn these Books of Agobardus tho he may be at a loss how it comes to pass that notwithstanding all this he is at this day held for a Saint and publickly ador'd at Lions under the Name of St. Agobo This is a Riddle which has strangly perplexed the Learned Jesuit Theophilus Raynaldus as well as le Cointe in his Annals of the Church of France But he is not the only Person that has oppos'd the Belief and Worship of the Church of Rome and is publickly ador'd by her I have another Author to produce who gives us so clear an Idea of the belief of this Diocess wherein he was born
first made use of a Canon of the Council of Sardica which gave them Power to send Legats into the Provinces to examine the Processes and the Depositions of any Bishops in Cases where any complaint was made After that they had thus accustomed the French Bishops to admit their Legats in this Case they by little and little gain'd another Point when the Princes were weak which was to send some amongst them without any Complaint or Appeal at all and at last after they had submitted to the Yoak Alexander II. established it as a Rule that the Pope ought to have the Government and Administration of all Churches Of these Legats some had a whole Kingdom under their Jurisdiction others some part only they came thither with full Power to depose Bishops yea the Metropolitan himself when ever they pleased to assemble the Councils of their District and to preside therein with the Metropolitan but taking place of him to make Canons to send the Decision of those Matters to the Pope to which the Bishops would not give their Consent as likewise all the Acts of the Council whereof he disposed at his Will and Pleasure And it is to be observed that their Suffrages outweigh'd those of all the Bishops together and that oftentimes by their simple Authority they judg'd and determin'd the Causes of the Elections of Bishops of Benefices of the Excommunications of Lay-men and the like Insomuch that these Assemblies which before were so Sacred and so Soveraign for the supporting and maintaining of Discipline having no Power any longer were to speak properly rather Councils to authorize and ratify the Will and Pleasure of the Pope than any lawful or free Councils So that it was not till the Papacy of Alexander II. and Gregory VII that the Churches of Aquitain saw themselves in danger of losing their Liberty by submitting to the Papal Yoak as well as the rest of the French Churches We are now to see how they avoided this Yoak which was thus imposed upon them in some measure CHAP. XIII Of the Opposition that was made by a Part of these Churches to the Attempts of the Popes and of their Separation from the Communion of Rome before Peter Waldo IT is difficult precisely to set down the Year wherein a considerable Part of these Diocesses rejected the Power of the Pope's Legats and lowdly condemned the Errors which they would have introduced under the Name of Councils which the Popes had so often assembled against Berengarius But we have great reason to conclude that it happened under Gregory VII when he undertook to oblige the Bishops of France to swear an Oath of Fidelity to him in much a like Form as Vassals swear to the Lords of the Fee for in reality it is the very same this strange Piece of Novelty which at one Blow destroy'd all the Rights of the Church excited both Pastors and People to defend their Liberties and to reject this imperious Yoak Then it was also that he endeavour'd to change the Common Service of the Church by striking out all that was not agreeable to the Roman Service which was very proper to inflame the Minds of the People and make them more watchful for the Preservation of the Doctrine and Ceremonies of Religion which they had received from their Ancestors For instance It is certain that in the 11 th Century they changed the Collects which concern'd the Prayer for the Dead We have an Example of it that was inserted in the Decretal of Gregory IX 'T is an Answer of Innocent III. to John de Beauxmains Archbishop of Lions who at that time was retired in the Abby of Clairvaux It contains the Question which that Archbishop who was the Persecutor and Condemner of Peter Waldo propounds to Innocent III. together with the Pope's Answer Your Brothership has enquir'd why there was a Change made in the Service of Saint Leo so that whereas the antient Books express the Prayer thus Grant to us Lord that this Offering may be of advantage to the Soul of thy Servant Leo in the modern Books it is exprest thus Grant to us O Lord we beseech thee that by the Intercession of St. Leo this Offering may be of advantage to us To which we answer saith the Pope That since the Authority of Scripture assures us that he doth an Injury to a Martyr who prays for a Martyr we are by a Parity of Reason to judg the same of other Saints because they need not our Prayers as being perfectly happy and enjoying all things according to their Wishes but it is we rather that stand in need of their Prayers who being miserable are in continuable trouble by reason of the Evils that surround us Wherefore such Expressions as these That such an Offering may be of advantage to this or that Saint for their Glory and Honour which we meet with in most Prayers are thus to be understood That it may conduce to this end that he may be more and more glorified by the Faithful here on Earth Though most suppose it a thing not unworthy of the Saints to assert that their Glory is continually encreased until the Day of Judgment and therefore that the Church may in the mean time lawfully wish for the encrease of their Glorification But whether in this Point that Distinction may take place which teacheth us that of those who are dead some are very good others very bad others indifferently good and others indifferently bad and therefore whether the Suffrages of Believers in the Church for the very good are Thanksgiving for the very bad Comforts to the Living for those who are indifferently good Expiations and for the indifferently bad Propitiations I leave to your Prudence to enquire Moreover the Popes Nicholas II and his Successors undertook to defend the Celibacy of the Clergy by which means a great many Pastors were depriv'd of the Functions of their Ministry which obliged also a vast number of them to separate themselves from the Communion of the Pope whose Creatures after the Decree was past for authorizng Celibacy look'd upon the married Clergy to be no more than simple Lay-men not to mention now that the Multiplicity of Schisms and Anti-popes had reduc'd most of the Diocesses of France into a strange Confusion some holding for one Pope others for another But though we cannot assign the precise Epocha of the beginning of this couragious Opposition to the See of Rome which had no other Original but the just Defence of their Liberties and the Desire of preserving their antient Truths yet thus much seems to be certain as far as we can gather from the poor Remainder of Records which the Barbarity of the Inquisitors hath suffer'd to come down to us 1. That this publick Opposition against the Efforts of Popery was made about the beginning of the 12 th Century 2. That without great Ignorance both in History and Chronology it cannot be supposed that the Albigenses were the Disciples of